Talk:Vanadium redox battery

Operation section
This item is a little weak on vanadium sulphide/bromide batteries and plain bromide batteries, can anyone help out here? Also the image is a little large and I can't see to shrink it down, help would be appreciated!! Astaroth5 14:00, 10 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I have never heard of the vanadium sulphide/ bromide battery. Do you mean sodium sulphide/ bromide (otherwise known as polysulphide/ polyhalide) that was employed by Regenesys? Also by bromide batteries do you refer to zinc-bromide? These two systems are deserving of entries in their own rights. In addition, there exists a vanadium-polyhalide battery invented by Skyllas-Kazacos in the UNSW. ahw001 17:20, 12 March 2006


 * It might have been sodium sulphide/bromide, I just remember comming across a mention of a sulphide/bromide battery in the middle of an article on vanadium redox, so I assumed it was vanadium sulphide/bromide. It seems you know more about these technologies than I do, so by all means, please modify the article to correct it! Astaroth5 17:38, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * They are competitors.Lesqual 02:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I removed the bit about National Power's flow battery (which was Regenesys) in the Operation section. I don't think it belongs there. Here's what is written: "It should be noted that National Power in the UK have also developed a redox flow battery, but one that is based on the use of two very different solutions, one of sodium sulphide and one of sodium bromide. While this system appears to give a higher power density it does carry additional problems as cross-contamination of the electrolytes is destructive to the battery." That really doesn't have any more relevance to VRB than any of a number of other flow battery technologies which aren't mentioned here. If it belongs anywhere, it belongs in the the "Flow battery" page. But it's also outdated. National Power became Innogy, which became RWE Innogy when it was bought by German company RWE AG, which pulled the plug on the Regenesys project, which was then, interestingly enough, sold (for a pittance) to VRB Power (a Vanadium Redox Flow battery company), ostensibly for its intellectual property and manufacturing tech. If there is any life left in Regenesys, it's hard to find on the web. If anyone knows more about it's[sic] history and current status, I'd suggest writing it up in the Flow battery article. Jfinlayson 10:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

why vanadium?
What about chromium and manganese? -lysdexia 03:10, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Gen 2
The Generation two vanadium redox batteries use VBr as the reactant and not VO2, allowing for greater solubility and thus energy density. I gleened this information from a ppt slide here:

http://www.eurosolar.org/new/pdfs_neu/electric/IRES2006_Skyllas-Kazacos.pdf

Energy Density
The various figures quoted for energy density or specific energy do not agree with each other. Which are correct? In the info box in the top section, 10-20Wh/kg is quoted (which seems low in comparison to other figures that I have seen. In the Energy Density section, 25Wh/kg is stated as the figure for current in-production units with research suggesting 35 or higher.

On a more pedantic note, the 'Energy Density' section exclusively quotes specific energy ratings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy Maybury (talk • contribs) 11:45, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Vanadium redox battery. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140824233209/http://www.dmgmoriseiki.com/en/posts/349-a-f-acquires-majority-stake-in-cellstrom to http://www.dmgmoriseiki.com/en/posts/349-a-f-acquires-majority-stake-in-cellstrom
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160131020936/http://uetechnologies.com/management.htm to http://uetechnologies.com/management.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131206170652/http://www.poweringnow.com/applications/electric-vehicles to http://www.poweringnow.com/applications/electric-vehicles
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110530235731/http://www.largoresources.com/projects/maracas/Maracas-Maps/default.aspx to http://www.largoresources.com/projects/maracas/Maracas-Maps/default.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:06, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

mass of vanadium in these batteries
I'm curious what the masses of the compounds are in these batteries, especially how much elemental vanadium there is per liter. I can't seem to find this answer.

https://www.google.com/search?q=vanadium+grams+per+liter+battery

UPDATE: somewhat answered my question: "By comparison, to make the electrolyte solution for a VRFB about 145 grams of vanadium pentoxide per litre is needed. For a 1.6MWh flow battery that’s equivalent to 15 tonnes." http://www.energystoragejournal.com/2016/11/14/flow-batteries-vanadium-supply/

Tarnas (talk) 23:46, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Applications
In the Applications section of this article the following sentence has no meaning: "Economically neither the UPS or frequency regulation applications of the battery are currently sustainable alone, but rather the battery is able to layer these applications with other uses to capitalize on various sources of revenue."

'Sustainable' in what way? Does any battery 'capitalize' on revenue? It appears to be muddling between batteries and the battery production industry. The sentence should be reworded (possibly as two or more sentences) or removed. FreeFlow99 (talk) 13:05, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Agreed, it was effectively incomprehensible as worded. Since none of the section is referenced, I just removed it. Anastrophe (talk) 06:58, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Proposed addition to last header
Tronstermn9 (talk) 16:35, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Information to be added or removed: In the last section that reads companies in the US, please add StorEn Technologies
 * Explanation of issue: This company also works on vanadium redox batteries in the US
 * References supporting change: Link 1, Link 2, Link 3, Link 4

LCOE
"...the levelized cost of energy ... is typically in the order of a few tens of $ cents or € cents..." But LCOE needs to be expressed in terms of cost per unit energy (e.g., dollars per kWh, euros/megajoule, etc.). Do we have a source for LCOE in meaningful units? Peter Chastain  [¡hablá!]  04:52, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

NPR investigative report from August 2022
An NPR investigative report from August 2022: https://www.npr.org/2022/08/03/1114964240/new-battery-technology-china-vanadium 173.88.246.138 (talk) 23:13, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Propose to add electrode, membrane, and electrolyte in material section
I suggest splitting the material section into three parts. Electrode, membrane, and electrolyte The content remains the same but is now more organized. Gary thelake (talk) 01:36, 6 November 2023 (UTC)